Griffith Research Online
https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au
Compassion without action: Examining
the young consumers consumption and
attitude to sustainable consumption
Author
Hume, Margaret
Published
2010
Journal Title
Journal of World Business
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2009.08.007
Copyright Statement
Copyright 2010 Elsevier. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance
with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the
definitive, published version.
Downloaded from
http://hdl.handle.net/10072/34316
Compassion without action: Examining the young consumers consumption and attitude to
sustainable consumption
Dr. Margee Hume*
Griffith Business School
Griffith University
Nathan Campus, 4111, Qld
Australia
[email protected]
Abstract
The concept of developing sustainable consumption practices has been a factor for discussion
within academic literature for nearly half a decade. Many have argued the consequences of
unmonitored consumption practices within a „throw-away‟ society would lead to environmental,
social and economic degeneration. With consumption no longer hindered by global boundaries,
there is an emergence of a common class of people within society consuming in vast amounts,
over great distances from one another, and reaps irreparable environmental damage. The onus of
developing sustainable practice is no longer the sole responsibility of economies of affluence and
specific segments of our economy but has become the responsibility of all stakeholders. Using a
triangulated qualitative approach, the aim of this research is to advance our understanding and
definition of sustainability in the key stakeholder group: the young consumers, Y generation.
The research will focus on understanding their consumption footprints and their view of the
notion of sustainability.
Implications for social changes, policy and practice will also be
presented.
Key words: Sustainability, Y generation, young consumers, economic sustainability,
environmental sustainability, consumption footprints.
*I would like to acknowledge the support of research assistants Celeste Alcaraz and Melissa
McLennan and funding from SIRC, Griffith University.
Introduction
The concept of developing sustainable consumption practices has been the focus of discussion in
the academic literature for nearly half a decade (Robins, 1999). Vance Packard (1960) argued
the consequences of unmonitored consumption practices within a „throw-away‟ society would
lead to environmental, social and economic degeneration. Barnet and Cavanagh (1994) state
consumption is no longer hindered by global boundaries due to the emergence of a common
class. This class consumes in vast amounts, over great distances from one another and reaps
irreparable environmental damage (Robins, 1999). The onus of developing sustainable practice
is no longer the sole responsibility of economies of affluence and specific segments of our
economy (Robins, 1999; Longhurst, 2006).
Rather, it has become a responsibility of all
stakeholders including and not limited to industry, government and community sectors including
customers. This paper will advance understanding, definition and approaches to sustainability in
the key stakeholder group; the young consumers Y generation (Ergi & Ralston, 2004) (those
born between 1978-1994).
Sustainability is a word with over three hundred definitions (Manderson, 2006). With a
lack of consensus on a clear definition, a clear set of the terms of reference, a clear understanding
of the variables that influence sustainable living, this topic warrants attention in the future
research agenda. The lack of a fundamental clear definition of sustainability impedes strategies
that change attitudes and behaviors and develop sustainable policy and practice. This inadequate
understanding and clarity of “what is sustainability” obstructs the communication of
sustainability to internal and external stakeholders. With many organizations hampered by the
limited understanding and ambiguous conceptualities of sustainable consumption, it is essential
2
we develop a patent comprehension of what is sustainability and what stakeholders are doing to
practice it.
The aim of this research is to advance our understanding and definition of
sustainability, in a particular stakeholder group, the Y generation cohort of the consumer
stakeholder group.
Although a wide variety of stakeholders, such as, not-for-profits, non-governmental
organisations, private sector organisations, specialist organisations and consumers, have been
identified within the literature, little knowledge pertains to perceptions, attitudes and beliefs of
sustainability and its facets (Daub and Ergenzinger, 2005). A key stakeholder valued in the
conceptualization of sustainable living and practice is the young consumer (Bentley, Fien and
Neil, 2004). Young consumers represent the future of our society (Heaney, 2006; Smola and
Sutton, 2002). They are the future consumers, the future workers and the future innovators
(McCrindle, 2007). Their role as the leaders and decision makers of the future, positions them as
ideal candidates to enlighten us of the issues related to developing sustainable strategies.
Examination of this generational segment will allow a more sophisticated understanding of
“young people” and the issues needed for the future i.e. sustainability. Marketing practice
researcher McCrindle (2007) has recognized the strong consumer value of this Y gen group, but
suggests that their social awareness has not translated into compassionate practice (McCrindle,
2007). Others have researched young people‟s consumption and how they can make changes in
their own consumption. They are catalysts for change when considering sustainable consumption
(Bentley, Fien and Neil, 2004). This research, however, has not specifically looked to define
their perception of sustainability and the elements they suggest influence sustainability.
Websites such as Popzine (2004) and interfacesustainability.com (2008) are reporting the
3
importance of living in harmony with the planet and creating sustainable living practices. It is
suggested that change strategies need to focus on making sustainable life styles cool and
fashionable, communicating the personal benefit of sustainable living to the young consumer. In
some countries, it is suggested 1 in 3 consumer dollars are spent by the young consumer
(Ginsberg, 2004). This group not only becomes essential to understanding sustainable practice
but also in creating much needed demand for sustainable changes.
It is suggested that social enlightenment of this busy, career focused, materialistic group
is questionable (McCrindle, 2007). With limited academic research, this view is subjective, but
warranting of further exploration.
By developing an understanding of the consumption
footprints and perspectives of the social conscience of this group, companies can develop
sustainable marketing strategies targeting this popular segment. It is essential for firms and
consumers to realize there is a direct correlation between life quality and social economic and
environmental and responsible consumption patterns (Robins, 1999; Placet, Anderson and
Fowler, 2005; Marrewijik and Were, 2003; Kilbourne, McDonagh and Prothero, 1997). Quality
of life not just related to material possessions.
The practice of excessive consumption is a key contributor to being un-environmental,
unsustainable, and causing social detriment.
Consumption patterns in modern society and
particularly, in the young consumer Y gen cohort, have changed and continue to change rapidly
due the breakdown of geographic boundaries and larger proportions of higher disposable
incomes (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Y gen consumers are purchasing more, demanding more and
living on a higher debt to equity ratio (Abela, 2006) than their parents. Researchers suggest
marketing as a major contributing factor to societal degeneration and excessive consumption in
4
this group. Marketing has been suggested to encourage hedonistic behavior (O‟Shaugnessy and
O‟Shaunessy, 2002). The more we consume the higher the firm‟s objective for market share, the
greater the marketing approach. Moreover, the more marketing, the more awareness and interest
created, increasing consumer consumption and profitability for firms. With the economic and
social motivation in the 21st century on developing and providing a sustainable world (Daub and
Ergenzinger, 2005) excessive consumerism, marketing and business practices and the consumer
behaviour of the young consumer, (O‟Shaughnessy and O‟Shaughnessy, 2002) must be explored
to nurture social change that assists in the construction of a sustainable world.
Defining Sustainability
In an attempt to advance sustainability, past definitions of sustainable practice have focused on
strategies that address environmental or ecological concerns.
Many organisations have
attempted to address sustainability through small internal cultural changes or development of
„greener‟ products (McCarthy, 2007) and greener practices. Many efforts have been slowed and
hampered due to a lack of interest of employees and/or consumer awareness. By recognizing
that the green environment is not the only bionetwork affected by consumerism and excessive
marketing practice and that sustainability should include other social and economic networks
(Christensen, Godskesen, Gram-Hassen, Quitzau and Ropke, 2007), a better understanding of
sustainable practice can be gained. By steering marketing practice towards considering broader
environments and environmental definitions (Connolly and Prothero, 2003), a comprehensive
approach to sustainable marketing and sustainable living can be achieved.
Daub and
Ergenezinger (2005) suggest three dimensions requiring consideration in the development and
implementation of a sustainable form of business management (Daub and Ergenzinger, 2005).
5
These include economic, social and ecological. The „firm‟ must seek to move beyond traditional
marketing practices and engage in society marketing to educate stakeholders about sustainability
within the marketplace (Daub and Ergenzninger, 2005).
Almost considered a „fad‟, company‟s practices to achieve sustainability are often
reactive, with strategies developed for short-term success or targeted towards a niche segment of
the marketplace (Dolan, 2002). The perception of limited profitability from these efforts has
hindered growth of the sustainability effort, with companies and consumers perceiving going
green and the cost of communicating the green message to the mainstream market as a green
provider too expensive and too difficult (Mader, 2008; Wirtenberg, Lipsky, Abrams, Conway
and Slepian, 2007). In addition, there has been little evidence to suggest success of these
endeavors (Daub and Ergenzinger, 2005; Wirtenberg et al, 2007). In particular, the success of
acceptance and adoption by the firm‟s targeted consumer. It is proposed that companies can
increase brand equity and reputation from potential consumers by undertaking sustainable
marketing practice which account for social, economic and ecological dimensions (Dolan, 2002).
Furthermore, the issue of corporate social responsibility, stakeholder responsibility and
marketing practice to influence sustainability are in the early stages of discussion and interest is
growing. Addressing sustainability is a multi-faceted approach. There is little cohesive research
pertaining to the definition of sustainability, with research into the triage of factors rudimentary.
Sustainability is largely viewed as a one-dimensional problem rather than a three dimensional
problem which has slowed sustainability research. This research will investigate and advance
these deficiencies by exploring the opinions of the Y generation with respect to consumption and
sustainable practice including economic, social, community and family, technological,
6
environmental, general business and marketing practice issues, and the future, in order to identify
the multiple dimensions of sustainability.
Consumerism
One of the main causes of environmental and social detriments is consumerism. Consumerism is
a term used to describe the effects of gathering and purchasing material possessions to increase
happiness and social position (Borgmann, 2000; Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Kasser and Ahuvia,
2002; O'Shaughnessy and O'Shaughnessy, 2002).
Recent research has suggested that the
excessive consumption of society negatively and detrimentally affects the sustainable living of
communities (Belk 1985, 1988). There is some evidence of those opting for a simple lifestyle,
rejecting the excesses of the modern consumer economy and positively engaging in sustainable
living (Belk, 1985; Borgmann, 2000; Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Kasser and Ahuvia, 2002;
O'Shaughnessy and O'Shaughnessy, 2002; Wright and Larsen, 1993; Zinkhan, 1994; Zinkhan
and Prenshaw, 1994); yet these case studies appear limited. Furthermore, current research and
practice by the anti-consumerist lobby is actively pursuing public policy and legislation that
restrains the activities that marketers can engage in to target consumers, innovate new services
and products, and use excessive packaging and more (O'Shaughnessy and O'Shaughnessy, 2002).
These groups favor encouraging ethical practice and the adoption of a responsible corporate and
social approach to marketing practice (Mujtaba and Jue, 2005; Borgmann, 2000,
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Kasser and Ahuvia, 2002).
Critics of consumerism argue that
materialism and strong affiliations with status enhancing brands (O'Guinn and Shrum, 1997;
Schmuck, Kasser and Ryan 2000; Zinkhan and Prenshaw, 1994) and consumer cultures has an
adverse effect on the social value of society and community. This suggests a relationship
7
between excessive consumption and sustainable community development (Zinkhan and
Prenshaw; 1994; O'Shaughnessy and O'Shaughnessy 2002; Wright and Larsen 1993).
Conversely, economic consumerists place much emphasis on consumption and suggest
that innovative development and high standards of living would not develop without the
economic impacts created by increased consumption and marketing (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995).
Moreover, economic consumerists suggest that consumers‟ freedom of choice should dictate
what is consumed, how much is consumed and the structure of the consumer society (Firat and
Venkatesh, 1995; Mujtaba and Jue, 2005). This research supports the view that any framework
developed to explore sustainability should focus directly on the consumer. Other researchers
suggest that consumption as such is not the problem. The problem is the life balances and „work
to spend culture‟ and environmental damage that comes with over-consumption that affects
society and is influencing the lack of sustainable living in our societies. They suggest that
strategies to reduce this problem and prevent this imbalance will assist in creating sustainable
consumption (Sanne, 2002). Whatever the belief (Belk and Pollay, 1985; Borgmann, 2000;
Twitchell, 2002) the debate is ongoing as to how marketing practice influences consumption and
whether it enhances or diminishes consumer welfare and influences sustainability
(O'Shaughnessy and O'Shaughnessy, 2002). To comprehensively advance the conception of
sustainability and sustainable strategies we need to indentify the factors and issues that are
perceived to be related to sustainability, sustainable innovation and sustainable marketing
practice. By exploring the Y generational segment (Heaney, 2006), this paper aims to advance
our understanding of these issues.
8
Generational framework for young consumers
Generation marketing is founded on research that links changes in values, motivations,
preferences and attitudes to different eras (Inglehart, 1997; Mitchell, 1998). The changes in
consumption expenditure, life experience, technological developments, environmental issues and
regulatory frameworks are argued to have a potentially significant impact on young people that
can best be understood by taking a generation approach. Generational determined lifestyles and
social values exercise as much influence on buying and purchasing as more commonly
understood demographic factors like income, education, and gender do, perhaps even more
(Schewe and Meredith, 2004; Wellner, 2000; Lake, 2006).
Different generations and demographic consumer groups are exposed to: a) different
social and economic opportunities and barriers, b) different types of technology activities, c)
different social perceptions and different community norms, and d) different life experiences and
events (Heaney, 2006).
The Y gen is known for wealth generation, excessive big ticket
spenders, conspicuous consumption, fashionistas, quick fixes and career advancement, all
characterized by excesses (Hoey, 2008). This group is seen as popular to marketers as excessive
consumption is suggested as both the antecedent and the consequence of the success of current
marketing and business practice by firms (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; O‟Shaugnessy and
O‟Shaugnessy, 2002; Hansen and Schrader, 1997).
The Generation Y are the parents of
tomorrows children. They are currently in tertiary education or early working life, are technology
efficacious, have been exposed to capitalist rule, the rise of China, high technology, globalization
and the opening of trade barriers, and are the “cool consumers” of products with “image”
(Heaney, 2006). They are conscious socially, culturally and environmentally; purposeful in
9
nature; confidant; require individual experiences and demand rationale due to a more skeptical
nature than previous generations (Sheahan, 2005; Sullivan and Heitmeyer, 2008). Self-interest is
a driving characteristic of this cohort; the Y Generation seeking authentic efforts from
organisations to capture attention (Sheahan, 2005).
Also, considered innovative and creative
due to traits of informality and lack of respect for traditional procedures and practices, this
generation are more likely to engage in processes which stimulate their internal motivating
desires (Sullivan and Heitmeyer, 2008; Sheahan, 2005; Heaney, 2006).
Generation Y are
considered the most consumption orientated generation of all time due to the abundance and
availability of products and services (Sullivan and Heitmeyer, 2008).
A generational approach is aimed at facilitating the development of sustainable living,
consumption and marketing practices for consumers using generation marketing (Morton, 2003;
Paul, 2001).
Sustainable consumption would mean consumption that balances time and
monetary expenditure, while satisfying basic needs of life and the future needs of generations
(Robins and Roberts, 1998). Sustainable consumption is closely aligned to quality of life and
consumer well being issues (Cornwell and Drennan, 2004). The main aim of this project is to
investigate this young consumer group to find meaning of sustainability and sustainable practice
and identify the issues and attitudes interrelated to sustainable practice and policy. This study
will be significant and innovative in its use of a generation‟s framework (Strauss and Howe,
1991) in researching young consumer‟s definitions and attitudes consistent with creating a
sustainable future (Harwood, 2002; Morton, 2003; Norum, 2003). We are not aware of any
previous research using this approach. A triangulated qualitative methodology is adopted, based
on the intention of the study, and the exploratory nature of this study.
10
Data and Method
The purpose of this study is to use qualitative methods to model the dimensions of sustainable
innovation and marketing practices in young consumers (Y gen) using a multi-perspective
(ecological, economic and social) approach. The current literature informs the conceptual map.
The conceptual map was used to develop and support the focus group and interview questions.
This research has generated themes from explanations and definitions offered in the literature
and examine how the themes fit the data collected from each of the consumer interviews. The
emergent themes are offered based on their data fit. Hyde (2000) and others (Holloway, 1997;
Mantzoukas, 2004) support using this practice in qualitative work as a practice for theory
generation.
This research uses a three-study approach to evaluate the perspectives of sustainability
and the actual practice in the Y gen segment.
First, the perspective of sustainability was
extracted from a combination of two focus groups (each with 8 persons). Second, the focus
groups were informed of the interview questions and in-depth interviews (22 interviews in total)
were conducted, gathered and advanced discussion on each of the sustainability perspectives.
Third, a set of footprint (analysis) surveys were conducted on 60 screened Y gen candidates. As
this project is an exploratory study, a defined generalized group of people who met all eligibility
criteria for full-scale research study were identified by the use of screening questions (Holloway,
1997). These customers functioned as lead users (von Hippel, 1986) in this context and were
found to be representative of this sample group. With careful sampling and equally careful
collection techniques, a surprisingly small number of interviews, narratives or focus groups can
11
yield the data to answer your research question (Holloway, 1997). The general rule in qualitative
research is that you continue to sample until you are not getting any new information or are no
longer gaining new insights. This is referred to as theoretical saturation. Moreover, theoretical
saturation is a process whereby themes and constructs from one case or interview are
substantiated by the evidence of another case (Eisenhardt, 1989). Theoretical saturation was
deemed to be achieved at 22 candidates. Moreover, consistent with the suggested valid range of
case sampling of more than ten cases (Eisenhardt, 1989); the 22 consultant interviews conducted
were found to be satisfactory for valid sampling.
With the main aim of this research to
investigate, define and identify factors that contribute to the development of sustainability,
sustainable living, innovation and marketing practice, opened ended interviews were conducted.
The specific question topics of what is sustainability, what are the economic, environmental,
social, family and community, technological and general business and marketing practice were
used. A final question asking generally about where we will be in the next 25 years was also
included. Findings of these interviews can be found in Table 1, specifically reporting the
definition of sustainability and strategies for the 25 years, with Table 2, reporting the issues
related to economic issues; people community and social issues; technological issues;
environmental and ecological issues.
A set of scripts were obtained from each of the candidates. Consistent with the method
outlined by Hubbert, Sehorn and Brown (1995), the unit of analysis was the script. The scripts
from both the focus groups and the interviews were transcribed. These transcripts included the
definitions and the meaning and expectations of “what is sustainability and the economic,
technological, social, people and community, environmental and ecological, and general business
12
and marketing practice issues that were important to the generation Y (young consumer). The
scripts were coded separately, with each issue recorded for each individual and then combined
recording frequency of responses. These were organized using a conceptual map (Miles and
Huberman, 1994) and analyzed based on understanding of the extant literature and frequency of
the response. This technique was derived from previous research and is consistent with Arnould
and Price (1993).
Actual practice was determined using a modified version of the ecological footprint
questionnaire based on content offered in current research (Kitzes, Peller, Goldfinger and
Wackernagel, 2007; Wackernagel and Rees, 1996; Rees, 1992). Ecological footprint compares
human demand on nature with the biosphere's ability to regenerate resources and provide
services (Rees, 1992). It does this by assessing the biologically productive land and marine area
required to produce the resources a population consumes and absorb the corresponding waste,
using prevailing technology. This metric looks at the consumption of energy, biomass (food,
fiber), building material, water and other resources which are converted into a normalized
measure of land area called 'global hectares' (gha). Ecological foot printing is now widely used
as an indicator of environmental sustainability (Rees, 1992). Other researches have used these
techniques for assessment of emissions and ecological impact from product consumption
(Browne, O‟Reagan and Moles, 2008). A group of candidates, who met all eligibility criteria for
full-scale research study, were identified by the use of screening questions and were asked to
complete a simple questionnaire based on their actual practice in daily lives using the items and
topic areas of the footprint questionnaire. These scripts were then collated and frequency of
recordings was collated.
Sixty (60) semi-structured footprints questionnaires in total were
13
conducted in a face-to-face interaction with candidates. Face to face implementation of the
survey allowed for clarification and further probing.
The frequencies of responses and
comments are presented in Table 3.
The research adopts a pragmatic interpretive approach that aims to provide an
understanding of the issues leading to explanation (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000; Crotty, 1998).
The use of theory building (Neumann, 2003) will identify and validate the number of factors that
will advance sustainable business and sustainable practice, from a purely „green‟ environmental
approach to incorporate other topics including economic, environment, family, social, economic,
technological, general business and marketing practice environments. The rationale for using a
qualitative approach was to ensure the extraction of thick descriptions related to the phenomenon
of sustainability and the emphasis on the triage of factors; economic, social and ecological. The
qualitative approach allowed for open discussion with candidates and clarification of responses.
Findings
The data in Table 1 illustrates the meanings that the respondents assigned to the term
sustainability and the issues they felt were important. Several interesting issued emerged. First,
the definition of sustainability is ethnocentric with very few consumers identifying global issues
and strategies. Most definitions related to local communities and supported strategies for local
environments and communities. There appeared to be a strong focus on the environment and
recycling with accountability for waste, damage and environmental balance as key factors.
Sustainable innovation focused on the creation of new products and services without harming
other services, business and environments and minimizing reinventing similar products merely
14
for competition. Table 1 data also offers insight into what consumers suggest as important issues
for the next 25 years and how they felt they could or would improve strategy for the
development of sustainable living.
The key areas highlighted included Corporate Social
responsibility (CSR), political agendas focused on sustainability, developing mind shifts in
consumer thinking about sustainability and creating sustainable education including courses and
programs that create jobs, focus on areas of community need and consider future environments
and needs.
_______________________Insert Table 1 here____________________________________
The data in Table 2 offers the issues respondents related to the economic issues, social
and people issues, environmental and ecological issues and general business practice and
marketing issues. Interestingly, the key economic factors offered related to income disparity and
wealth distribution, inflation and interest rates and how they affect the consumer‟s ability to buy
affordable housing and the standard of living. Loan practices and the development of sustainable
corporate investment also featured in the economic issues required for sustainability. Social
issues focused heavily on the care of the vulnerable and the aged, the development of
communities and villages, discouraging excessive consumption; crime and education. Each of
these being the focus for creating sustainable future living. Environmental factors focused on the
depletion of the earth‟s resources, climate change, animal extinction, both corporate and
individual waste, renewable energy and recycling are the main issues. Preservation of natural
spaces, taxation on emissions and corporate social responsibility were also included yet not as
frequent.
________________Insert Table 2 here____________________________________
15
Interestingly, marketing and business practice focused on energy efficiency and environmental
policies as the most important areas, with the use of the Internet, responsible innovation, support
of agribusiness, profit sustainability tradeoffs, environmental audits, tax incentives, shame files
and the development of environmentally safe distribution channels all emphasized as important.
It was evident this group took a proactive approach to marketing strategies and focused on what
business could do to improve the situation rather than adopt a blame approach for past sins of
firms and the role of marketers and business in creating consumerism and materialism.
The final tabulation of findings was the results of the footprint questionnaire. Table 3
reports the extremes of behavior offering a snapshot of the actual practice of the young
consumer. Some candidates did suggest that depending on time and financial circumstances,
they may adopt more environmentally friendly practices. These would be an exception to their
behavior. It was evident that the practice of this group was far from their compassionate beliefs
about how to create sustainability and the creation of sustainable consumption. Results indicated
that only one candidate out of 60 practices waste recycling, 6 candidates practice
environmentally friendly transportation, using cycling and walking as the preferred method of
transportation, with all candidates using or proposing to use aircraft more that once a year for
holidaying and general transportation. The majority of candidates had no water saving devices
apart from (3) that had home water tanks. No person grew their own food or vegetables, lent or
borrowed uncommon items and recycled technology. All candidates owned more than four
pieces of technology, updated them regularly for better models and threw away the older
versions when superseded. There was a large number of candidates living in large homes
however most lived in share housing, units and average size houses. Many candidates (37) lived
in large housing with only one other co-habitant.
16
__________________Insert Table 3 here________________________________________
The footprint data gathered revealed some very interesting behaviors. It is evident that
the humanistic approach to defining sustainability was not evident in practice. It was evident
that this highly technologically efficacious group did not practice any recycling, renewable
energies consumption and produce production. An important practice was to update technology
for the latest models with little thought to the disposal of the older units. Conservative transport
practices do not appear evident, with flying seen as an essential and necessary annual activity.
Is the disparity between the altruistic compassionate values toward defining and understanding
sustainable living and their footprint practicing hypocrisy or a failure to convert knowledge into
practice or purely a lack of action? Alternatively, are the definitions offered on the meaning and
needs for sustainability merely a regurgitation of the hype of green marketing and sustainability
propaganda? Is there still hope for change and implementation of sustainable practice is this
group? In addition, what can we do to educate them into change?
Contribution to theory and practice
Interestingly, this research supports the early exploratory work of other researchers. Shaw,
Newholm and Dickinson (2006) established there was tension between consumer power and
choice and sustainable choice living. Albeit this study was small and not identically focused,
early evidence supports the findings of paradox between thought and action. This research
further cements the findings of Tanner and Kast (2003) who suggested that green purchases were
not significantly linked to moral thinking and socio economic characteristics of consumers.
Green purchases were found to be related positively to attitude to local producers and negatively
associated to time inconveniences. It is evident from this work, that there is a strong moral
17
stance on sustainability and support for sustainable practice, with practice considerably limited.
This finding is of importance and suggests that other dimensions outside the bounds of principles
and ideals drive actual social action.
There is no doubt that further research into the
identification of the drivers of sustainable practice in all generations, especially the Y gen,
advancing Tanner and Kast (2003) is warranted and would be of value.
Implications for Future research
No doubt, this group reflects the generational attitudes they have developed over time. Modern
technologies, life luxuries, booming economies, open trade and travel barriers are all
generational factors of this sample.
These influences certainly affect the practice and
understanding of sustainability. Future research would be encouraged in other generational
segments, such as the X generation and the baby boomers, to ascertain if the disparity between
understanding and practice is evident. The study is limited by the different sample groups used
to extract meanings and to ascertain practice, however this was preferred so not to bias the group
and gain a clearer reflection of real footprint practice. Future research would be well suited for a
large empirical survey ranking and rating consumer perceptions to the aspects identified by this
group.
Moreover, large-scale examination of consumption using the modified footprint
questionnaire would also further advance this area of research.
Managerial Relevance
It is evident that there is some understanding of the requirements of sustainability and that the
implementation or ease of implementation is the issue for the Y generation. This cohort, albeit
educated and considered environmentally aware, was highlighted not to engage in sustainable
18
requirements. This group shows a compassionate humanistic understanding of what is required
to create sustainability yet focuses these only on local and parochial issues. The Y Generation
are ego driven in nature and expect attempts from organizations to encourage sustainable
practice to be genuine and aligned with self interests. The research has highlighted the direct
conflict between the consumption patterns of the Y Generation and compassionate sustainability
values. In order to overcome this, programs and policies must demonstrate the ease at which one
can reduce their ecological footprint and practice sustainable living. Change agents need to
capture this group‟s behaviors by identifying their triggers to resisting change. The strategies
and social change impetus must show how easy, fashionable and “cool” it is to create a
sustainable world. In order for sustainability to improve, rather than merely quality of life, a
global outlook needs to be adopted. Focus of sustainable change strategies should be aimed on
Generation Y as a desired audience. Messages disseminated to capture Generation Y‟s attention
must appeal to their self-interests and idealism and dispersed in areas where they congregate.
Social change campaigns need to include incentive and understanding of the needs for the future
and how the impact of poor practices and excessive consumption will damage the world and its
people.
This group needs to be informed that their contribution to sustainable practice is
required, with sustainable practice designed and articulated as simply and conveniently as
possible. This group will not seek out change if it is not cost effective, convenient and selfserving. For their compassionate ideals to be constructed into practice and action this group need
to be nurtured and convinced of the changes without their requiring of too much effort.
Conclusion
The primary aim of this paper was to examine the factors involved in defining and identifying
the notion of sustainability, sustainable living, innovation and marketing practice. To enable
19
further understanding regarding the intricate features involved within the sustainability debate, a
generational approach was undertaken. Thus, the second aim of this paper was to further
understand the notion of sustainability amongst the most consumption orientated generation of
all time, Generation Y.
Although these groups of consumers are considered socially,
economically and environmentally conscious, a clear pattern of contradiction exists between
what they know and what they practice in regards to sustainability efforts. Such findings has led
to the suggestion for the need for marketing innovations and practices to take a societal stance
and focus on the self interested nature of this cohort. The findings from this study also suggest
other generational cohorts should be considered for further analysis to allow conveyance of a
clear message regarding the impact of unsustainable practices and detriments on society.
20
References
Abela, A.V. (2006). Marketing and Consumerism. European Journal of Marketing, 40(1/2): 516.
Arnould, E.J., & Price, L.L. (1993). River Magic: Extraordinary Experience and the Extended
Service Encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1): 24-45.
Barnet, R., & Cavanagh, J. (1994). Global Dreams. Simon & Schuster: New York in Robins, N.
(1999) Making sustainability bite: transforming global consumption patterns. The Journal of
Sustainable Product Design. (online)(6 February 2007) Retrieved March 23, 2008 from:
http://www.bo.cnr.it/www-sciresp/OLD/Bacheca_OLD/pdf00000.pdf#page=7.
Belk, R.W. (1985). Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in the Material World. Journal of
Consumer Research, 12(3): 265-280.
Belk, R.W. (1988). Possessions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2):
139-168.
Belk, R.W., & Pollay, R.W. (1985). Image of Ourselves: The Good Life in Twentieth Century
Advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 11: 887-897.
Bentley, M., Fien, J., & Neil, C. (2004). Sustainable consumption: Young Australians as agents
of change. Canberra, Australia: National Youth Affairs Research Scheme: 1-156.
Borgmann, A. (2000). The Moral Complexion of Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research,
26(4): 418-422.
21
Browne, D., O'Regan, B., & Moles, R. (2008). Use of embodied energy and ecological
footprinting to assess the global environmental impact of consumption in an Irish city-region.
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Abingdon: May 51,(3): 447.
Christensen, T.H., Godskesen, M., Gram-Hassen, K., Quitzau, M., & Ropke, I. (2007). Greening
the Danes? Experience with consumption and environment policies. Journal of Consumer
Policy, 30: 91-116.
Connolly, J., & Prothero, A. (2003). Sustainable consumption: Consumption, consumers and the
commodity discourse. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 17: 275-291.
Cornwell, B., & Drennan, J. (2004). Cross-cultural Consumer Consumption Research: Dealing
with Issues Emerging from Globalization and Fragmentation. Journal of Macromarketing, 24(2):
108-121.
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research – Meaning and Perspective in the
Research Process, Australia: Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Reflections and Reviews: The Cost and Benefits of Consuming.
Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2): 267-272.
Daub, C., & Ergenzinger, R. (2005). Enabling sustainable management through a new multidisciplinary concept of customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9/10): 9981217.
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000). Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed), USA: Sage
Publications.
Dolan, P. (2002). The Sustainability of „Sustainable Consumption‟. Journal of Macromarketing,
22: 170-181.
22
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theory From Case Study Research. Academy of Management
Review, 14(4): 592-611.
Ergi, C.P., & Ralston, D.A. (2004). Generation cohorts and personal values: A comparison of
China and the United States. Organizational Science, 15(2): 210-220.
Firat, A.F., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Liberatory Postmodernism and the Reenchantment of
Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3): 239-267.
Ginsberg, B. (2004) Purchasing for Sustainability: Young Consumers in the Green Marketplace:
Why Youth? Why You? Retrieved 10th October 2008, from
http://www.popsustainability.org/popzine/issue3/trends3.htm.
Hansen, U., & Schrader, U. (1997). A Modern Model of Consumption for a Sustainable Society.
Journal of Consumer Policy, 20(4): 443-468.
Harwood, M. (2002). Talking to the generations: How to market to different age groups.
Community Banker, 11(7): 28-33.
Heaney, J. (2006). Generations X and Y‟s internet banking usage in Australia. Journal of
Financial Services Marketing, 11(3): 196-210.
Hoey, T. (2008). How to turn generation Y into generation $. Sydney Morning Herald. 15th
March Retrieved 22nd October 2008, from,
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/03/15/1205472147009.html
Holloway, I. (1997). Basic Concepts for Qualitative Research. Blackwell Publishing,
Hubbert, A.R., Sehorn, A.G., & Brown, S. (1995). Service expectations: The consumer versus
the provider. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 6(1): 6 - 21.
23
Hyde, K.F. (2000). Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research Qualitative Market
Research. An International Journal, 3 (2): 82-90.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political
change in 43 societies, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Kasser, T., & Ahuvia, A. (2002). Materialistic Values and Well Being in Business Students.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(1): 137-146.
Kilbourne, W., McDonagh, P., & Prothero, A. (1997). Sustainable Consumption and the Quality
of Life: A Macromarketing Challenge to the Dominant Social Paradigm. Journal of
Macromarketing, 17(4): 4-24.
Kitzes, J., Peller, A., Goldfinger, S., & Wackernagel, M. (2007). Current Methods for
Calculating National Ecological Footprints Accounts. Science for Environment and Sustainable
Society, 4 (1).
Lake, L. (2006). The power of generation marketing. (online) (10 January 2007) Retrieved: 20
April, 2008, from http://marketing.about.com/od/demographics/a/generationmktg.htm.
Longhurst, M. (2006). Mediating for sustainable consumption. Consumer Policy Review, 16(4):
131-137.
Mader, B. Is Going Green Too Expensive for Most People? Sep 1, 2008
http://contractormag.com/columns/editorial/going_green_expensive/
Manderson, A.K. (2006). A Systems Based Framework to Examine the Multi-contextual
Application of the Sustainability Concept. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8(1):
85-97.
24
Mantzoukas, S. (2004) Issues of Representation within Qualitative Inquiry.
Qualitative Health Research, 14, (7): 994-1007.
Marrewijik, M.V., & Were, M. (2003). Multiple Levels of Corporate Sustainability. Journal of
Business Ethics, 44: 107-119.
McCarthy, S. (2007). Sustain or become obsolete. Supply Management, 12(13): 34-35.
McCrindle Research (2007). Socially conscious or selfish and materialistic? Retrieved 22nd
October from http://www.mccrindle.com.au.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An Expanded Sourcebook: Qualitative Data Analysis
(2nd ed.), NY: Sage Publications International.
Mitchell, S. (1998). American generations: Who they are, how they live, what they think (2nd
ed.), Ithaca, NY: New Strategist.
Morton, L.P. (2003). Targeting CEOs. Public Relations Quarterly, 48(1): 43-44.
Mujtaba, B., & Jue, A.L. (2005). Deceptive and Subliminal Advertising in Corporate America:
Value Adder or Value Destroyer? Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship.
(online) (31 Jan, 2007) Retrieved: May 25, 2008, from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5383/is_200501/ai_n21364362/pg_16.
Neumann, L.W. (2003). Social Research Methods – Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.
USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Norum, P. S. (2003). Examination of generational differences in household apparel expenditures.
Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 32(1): 52-75.
25
O‟Guinn, T.C., & Shrum, L.J. (1997). The Role of Television in the Construction of Consumer
Reality. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(4): 278-294.
O‟Shaugnessy, J., & O‟Shaugnessy, N.J. (2002). Marketing, the consumer society and hedonism.
European Journal of Marketing, 36(5/6): 524-547.
Packard, V. (1960). The Waste Makers. Penguin: Harmondsworth in Robins, N. (1999) Making
sustainability bite: transforming global consumption patterns. The Journal of Sustainable
Product Design (online)(27 October 2007) Retrieved: March 23, 2008, from
http://www.bo.cnr.it/www-sciresp/OLD/Bacheca_OLD/pdf00000.pdf#page=7.
Paul, P. (2001). Getting Inside Gen Y. American Demographics, 23(9):42-49.
Placet, M., Anderson, R., & Fowler, K.M. (2005). Strategies for Sustainability. Research
Technology, 48(5): 32-41.
Rees, W. E. (1992). Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban
economics leaves out. Environment and Urbanisation. 4(2): 121-131. Retrieved: 23 march 2008
from http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/frequently_asked_questions/).
Robins, N. (1999). Making sustainability bite: Transforming global consumption patterns. The
Journal of Sustainable Product Design. (online)(4 December 2007) Retrieved: March 23, 2008,
from http://www.bo.cnr.it/www-sciresp/OLD/Bacheca_OLD/pdf00000.pdf#page=7.
Robins, N., & Roberts, S. (1998). Consumption in a Sustainable World: Report of the Workshop
held in Kabelvåg, June 2–4 1998, Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Environment.
Sanne, C. (2002). Willing Consumers – or locked in? Policies for a sustainable consumption.
Ecological Economics, 42(1/2): 273-287.
26
Schewe, C.D., & Meredith, G. (2004). Segmenting global markets by generational cohorts:
Determining motivations by age. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 4(1): 51-63.
Schmuk, P., Kasser, T., & Ryan, M. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goals: Their Structure and
Relationship to Well-Being in German and U.S. College Students. Social Indicators Research,
50(2): 225-241.
Shaw, D., Newholm, T., & Dickinson R. (2006). Consumption as voting: An exploration of
consumer empowerment. European Journal of Marketing. Bradford, 40(9/10): 1049-1067.
Sheahan, P. (2005). Generation Y: Thriving and Surviving with Generation Y at Work, Australia:
Hardie Grant Books.
Smola, K.W., & Sutton, C.D. (2002). Generational differences: revisiting generational
work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363-382.
Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069,
New York: William Morrow.
Sullivan, P., & Heitmeyer, J. (2008). Looking at Gen Y shopping preferences and intentions:
exploring the role of experience and apparel involvement. International Journal of Consumer
Studies, 32: 285-295.
Tanner, C., & Kast, S.W. (2003). Promoting sustainable consumption: Determinants of green
purchases by Swiss consumers. Psychology & Marketing. 20, (10), p.883-902
Twitchell, J.B. (2002). Living it up: Our love affair with luxury. Columbia: University Press.
von Hippel, E. (1986). Lead Users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science,
32, (7):791-805.
27
Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W.E. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on
the Earth. New Society Press.
Wellner, A.S. (2000). Generational divide. American demographics, 22(10): 52-58.
Wirtenberg, J., Lipsky, D., Abrams, L., Conway, M., & Slepian, J. (2007). Empowerment, waste
and new consumption communities. Organization Development Journal, 25(2): 11-21.
Wright, N.D., & Larsen, V. (1993). Materialism and life satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and Complaining Behavior, 6: 158-165.
Zinkhan, G.M. (1994). Advertising, materialism and quality of life. Journal of Advertising,
23(2): 1-4.
Zinkhan, G.M., & Prenshaw, P.J. (1994). Good life images and brand name associations.
Advances in Consumer Research, 21: 496-500.
28
TABLE ONE: HOW CAN WE IMPROVE OUR APPROACH TO IT IN THE NEXT 25 YEARS AND WHAT IS SUSTAINABILITY
Improvement Issues for the next 25 years
Very Frequently mentioned

Political agendas need to focus on
sustainability and current
sustainable business practices

Shifts in consumers attitudes and
values towards sustainability need
to be addressed using social change
campaigns

Education of individuals
What is sustainability
Frequently mentioned

Increase CSR, regulations and
compliance,

reemergence of the village
philosophy, Increased community
and social integration and physical
social interaction around
sustainability projects

Next generation is the most
important issue (Gen Z), beyond
educating, real life experiences
imperative

Social issues: Health care, aged
care, greenhouse and climate, war,
religion

Sustainability addressed as a
global issue

Growth of less developed
countries

Work life balance , look to
education courses where there
future and jobs,

health and obesity strategies

Focus on socially moral issues to
direct consumers based on their
perceptions

Ethnocentric views towards
sustainable practices –
collaborative focus needed for
global acceptance

Developing and delivering a clear
definition of sustainability to
enforce change – without
understanding, change is minimal

Manage Societal degeneration
created by Gen tech – less
communication of face to face
contact

Planning the present, investing and
developing new technologies,
processes and practices

Raise social awareness
Less Frequently mentioned

Increase sense of community belonging,
to reduce transport costs focus on the
creation of community hubs physically
and through technology

Terrorism

Balance of investment to cover
sustainability issues

Increase incentives for implementing
CSR and developing community increase
incentives to business to position in
suburbs‟ and communities to create
villages.

Positive reinforcement for reducing travel
and emissions by operating small stores
locally.

Creations of new core values from family
and maintain and educate traditional-shift
and include a sustainable life

Ensuring countries using a vast amount
of natural resources of the world or are
major contaminants become responsible
for such actions

Larger developed countries to offer aid to
countries with large resource shortages

Domino effect – address all segments of
the market to address the sustainability
issue
The young consumer perspective
1. What to have today to keep for tomorrow ****
2. Ability to maintain the particular product, situation
among the environmental changes and an ability for
the service or product to be sustained
3. Subsistent from other countries e.g. produce and
consumes within household, the surplus sold;
reduce dependency on materials from other
countries to ultimately decrease waste into the
environment
4. Creation of something that will last without
damaging something else
5. Continuation of current strategies but including and
addressing sustainability
6. Sustainability issues range in difference pending on
the interpretation by a country and the particular
problems to reverse
7. Is creating marketing practice that doesn‟t make
companies make too many products and consumers
consume too much
8. Supporting and running a business to respect the
environment and the community with a full
stakeholder effort
9. Improved quality of life, taking in to account social
and CSR to meet current needs without threatening
future generations**
10. In poorer and developing countries Sustainability
cannot be achieved unless continuous improvements
and innovations are made to include both internal
country and external countries needs
11. Sum of all practices that combined improve human
activities and „quality of life‟****
12. Balance between progress of nations/firms and the
environment***
13. Issue of limitation of resources in the world and we
will protect them***
14. Developing practices that are enduring and efficient,
always considering the preservation and
improvement of environmental and community
health
***Statements with * were repeated by candidates
Table Two: economic issues; people community and social issues; technological issues; environmental and ecological issues
Frequently
Less Frequently
Very Frequently
Economic
Unevenly distributed

Interest rates balanced

Managing growth crash or bust
world‟s population

Inflation Rates

New industry management and market entry
Social and educational

The need for companies to be established under the belief of

Managing financial growth and its impact of CSR, community and natural
gaps on a global level
sustainable investment practices
resources
Income disparity

Profit motives balanced with investment directed towards

Managing the gap between international currencies
sustainable practice

Aim of less developed countries to aspire to „Western Style‟ economies – e.g. Thai

The need to consider the economic status of emerging countries
economy driven by other nationalities rather than independent ideologies

Production constraints due to scarcity of resources

Mange niche markets arising

Bridging the large gap between emerging countries and

Changes in investor behavior, cost factors, emerging economic forces
developing countries

Investment to restitute and restore usage or damages

Introducing loan support and strict protocols for money lending
Social people and community
Very Frequently
Frequently
Less Frequently
Housing, investment,

Materialism and excessive consumption

Physical isolation reintegrating single households into community connecting
interest rates, hourly pay
communicates using technology

Neglect from government in less developed countries
rates

Population growth of developing countries leading to food scarcity in food,

Sustainable issues achievable through word of mouth – people and
accommodation and migration issues
peers
Care for the community

Increase in criminal activity

Share common values and respect and take into consideration
growing, ageing
people, family and community

Socialization to increase independency and self esteem

Travel time to work and transport infrastructure to make travel

Dissolution of the family structure
Excessive, dangerous
more efficient

Emergence of sub-cultures
consumption

Educational courses for the real world i.e. guaranteed employment

Working hours reduced social and leisure time work life balance

Conscious awareness increased of sustainable issues

Urban sprawl household prices too expensive near CBD
Technological
Very Frequently
Frequently
Less Frequently
Privacy Invasion –

Making technology more social and intimate-.webcam and audio

Legal Issues – breakdown of geographic boundaries aids in legal ramifications
security issues of the
being null or difficult to pursue

Continually advancing technology speed and capacity
internet

Aggressive information

Luxury product, status symbol representative of social class
Convenience, minimal

Packaging Innovation

E-learning rather than E-entertainment
time and economic costs,

Technological innovation can add value to sustainability issues

Increase in online communications resulting in lack of deep
efficiency of content and
conversation to simple words delivery

Sharing information with partners of alliance
practice

Internet addiction

New and improved interactive, mobile tools – visual, audio, emotional, tactile
Adaptability towards

Cyber isolation
technology

Social networking
Environmental and ecological
Very Frequently
Frequently
Less Frequently
30
Table Two: economic issues; people community and social issues; technological issues; environmental and ecological issues
Frequently
Less Frequently
Very Frequently
Individuals taking more

Corporate Social Responsibility

Changes in weather patterns will directly affects consumer‟s habits and routines
responsibility for impact

Global warming and destruction of forests

Eco Tourism, green marketing
on environment

New initiatives and programs for developments plus incentives to

Preservation of natural resources however always prioritizing human/social capital
Recycle, Fuel efficiency,
recue practices that deplete natural resources

Tax on emissions
green, renewable energy,

Protection of future generations by managing the environment
power, Bio-fuel
General business and marketing practice
Very Frequently
Frequently
Less Frequently
Energy efficient business

Traditional business channels replaced by internet and interactive

New channel and tools increase knowledge and practice of CSR increase emphasis
increasingly important
channels of distribution
on alliance and relationships with community increase privatizations outsourcing
New marketing practices
and consulting

Application of technological innovations as a pathway to business
for new generations

New approaches to branding
to customers
Incorporation and

Investing responsibly, reducing packaging and waste,

Individualism an important ideal for many
implementation of
employment, sensible management, human resource systems

Organizational strategy development, move from short term profit focus
appropriate policies and

Agricultural sector expected to grow in face of food reduction

Environmental audits
regulations
from global warming

Sustainability implemented at all levels of the corporation from top level

Societal marketing practices essential to enhance changes in
management to bottom level workers – incorporate in the mission, goals and
consumption patterns and attitudes towards the respect of the
objectives of a company
planet and community care.
31
Table Three: Modified Ecological Footprint Questionnaires Results
TABLE THREE: FOOTPRINT RESULTS
Bio mass factors: Eats processed meats, cheese and diary
Bio mass factors: Do you consume packaged food regularly daily? Weekly?
Monthly?
Bio mass factors: Recycling of waste in particular separating rubbish, reusing
materials for other purposes such as building, clothing and paper.
Technology: Do you own more than two pieces of technology and replace them
regularly
Building: What is the size of your home and how many people share
Never chooses the friendly
option and/or adopts
unfriendly practices
All (60)
53
Practices positive
behavior less that
once a month
0
2
No
comment
41
3
16
60
0
0
37 large homes not filled to
capacity
2
0
5
Waste: How much waste do you generate 1 or more garbage bags, bins etc
40 (4-6 bags per week)
Waste: Do you repair and renovate goods
Carbon: Do you have more than one fridge
Carbon saving: Do you use any forms of renewable energy? Such as Rechargeable
batteries?
Water conservation: Do you use water saving devices? Own a water tank and
conserve water?
Carbon: Do you fly on a plane annually, monthly, weekly
Carbon: Do you drive a car more than 100 kilometres a week
Carbon: How many people travel in your car?
57
52
41
10 homes with more
that 3+ &11 flat/unit
with co habitants
12 (1-2 bags per
week)
0
6
8 recharge batteries
46
3 tanks
11
57
All total 60
Mostly alone 52 people
3
0
5
Carbon saving: Do you walk or cycle to work, shops for leisure
Most drove or took public
transport (56 )
All did not grow produce
57
0
0
3 commute and car
pool
1 rode bike
0
0
0
3
**8
0
Bio mass reduction: Do you grow your own food fruit or vegetables
Water conservation and Bio mass reduction: Do you mulch your garden and
recycle garden waste
Carbon saving: Do you use any renewable energy sources in your home or
workplace
8 considered rechargeable
batteries as renewable , no
8
3
2
11
3
32
Do you use any renewable energy with your transport
Carbon: Do you use air-conditioning or heating
Renewable recycling: Do you lend and borrow and share items amongst friends
and family that you do not need or use often
Do you manage your debt and consumption?
Do you believe you make more effort to protect the environment that you did 1-5
years ago
solar
59 no
All use air-conditioning in
summer
Most borrowed books from a
library, No other borrowing
Most spent what they earn and
saved little and owned several
credit cards 47
12 (worse)
1 bike rider
0
0
0
0
0
2 saved and non
credit
11
30 (yes)
18 (no
change)
33
34